Baseline submission to Client

Hi Kannan

In my opinion: Yes. By my experience frequently delayed client's approvals of documents lead to delays of the project.

But what I can't understand is: In a good co-operation contractor in my opinion should show such a bottleneck in his reporting.

Regards

Dieter 

Hi Dieter,

Thanks for the reply.

But during the baseline approval process in the beginning of project, how the contractor can justify it? (client review in the critical path).

If the Client says that he dont want to see the review process in the critical path, how can the contractor justify his schedule. Cant the client say that as per the contract requirements/allowed duration he would finish the review process on time?

Regards

Kannan

Kannan

Critical path does not mean late. You as the scheduler must make both sides aware of this document. Is there a chance to shorten time for creation or for an agreement to shorten the time for approval? Then the critical path may be elsewhere.

One of planner's tasks is to make aware of bottlenecks and show ways to reduce the risk. If client is involved - here by approval of documents - both sides must discuss your proposal how to shorten this sequence.

I'm sure, this document later will make some trouble. So better fight now.

Good luck!

Dieter 

Hi Dieter,

The creation and the approval durations are fixed. Other construction activitie's durations are fixed based on the productivity rate.

As you said I can try to convince them that the critical path means not delay and to find other possible ways adjust the construction section.

Other possible way is to increase the duration of the some procuremnt items which will drive the equipments installation activities. Or to increase the duration of NOC/Permit documents from Govt authorities (assuming that it may take more time) which will drive the civil related activities at site. Therefore the client review activities will get float.

Thanks

Kannan

Hi Kannan

It seems as though the Contractor is setting up his programme to generate EoT when the client's approval is late.

However in respect of MEP it may be that the approval is critical.

Check all the critical items on a filter \and see if there is any obvious manipulation.

If there is more than 1 critical path that is a clear indication that the programme has been rigged so the first stage is to insist on only 1 critical path and then review that.

Best regards

Mike Testro

Hi Kannan

So you have the chance to create some reserves which you didn't use up to now, use it. It depends how many approvals you'll need if this really will improve your situation. I would try to discuss this with client's planner and the client to avoid the situation Mike mentioned.

Good luck!

Dieter

Thanks for reply Mike.

At present there is only 1 critical path and the client review process is in it. Project Manager wants to submit the programme with the client review in the critical path and suggested that it can be explained in the narrative and meeting.

Regards

Kannan

Dieter

We are going to discuss this with the Client.

Thanks

Kannan

The client can certainly quesiton the logic and durations of the items in the schedule. The review of the submission could indeed be on the critical path. This would assume that all of the proper chain of events are correctly shown such as creation of the submittal, review and approval of the submittal followed by any procurement activities which would lead up to installation testing and commissioning, punch list items and final completion.

If I was the client I would also check to see if any unecessary constraints are being used which is making this be on the path critical.

Hi, Kannan.

Managing client activities on the critical path is tricky, fraught with dangers of annoying the client.

One of the things I have often had my clients do is, in very objective and mathematical terms, show them that only are there activities on the critical path but that they have precisely X amount of drag. Then we explain TWO things:

1. That for every day thet the client extends the activity, it will result in an equal (or sometimes greater if it requires time to reassemble the team!) delay for the whole project; but also
2. That they can SAVE an amount of time equal to the activity's drag IF (a) they can shorten it AND (b) they inform us NOW that they will be shortening it AND (c) they live up to that promise. (If they don't, they need to understand that there may be a reassembly delay.)

This has three beneficial impacts:

1. The quantification of drag is so mathematical that it makes the whole explanation objective;
2. It allows the client to see that your analysis can actually HELP the client by showing how to shorten the project; and
3. The client sees that you are knowledgeable of the very latest in critical path theory (i.e., critical path drag).

Fraternally in project management,

Steve the Bajan

Hi Zoltan,

Thanks for reply.

I agree with you that all the logic should be proper in the schedule. There are no unnecessary constraints. Here in our case we expect that the Client may ask to remove the review process from the critical path.

Regards

Kannan

a clinet can not just ask to remove the review process from the critical path. If it happens to fall on the critical path then so be it. He wants you to take it off of the critical path so that if he does not turn around the review documents in the required time then HE is delaying the project and you will be entitled to a time extension which he wants to avoid. 

a clinet can not just ask to remove the review process from the critical path. If it happens to fall on the critical path then so be it. He wants you to take it off of the critical path so that if he does not turn around the review documents in the required time then HE is delaying the project and you will be entitled to a time extension which he wants to avoid.